EK: It seems your view is that just as the market needs to have faith in your demographics and in the flexibility of your labor market and the competitiveness, it has to have faith in your political system’s capacity to deal with long and short-term threats. Do you see any reason for the market to have that faith right now?

TC: No. One of my biggest worries is what happens if Romney wins and Republicans control both chambers, do they have the courage to do what it takes to fix the country? It’s kind of their last chance. If they’re given the favor of control and they don’t act on it, why should you ever trust them again? You shouldn’t. It’ll be the death knell of the Republican Party. They controlled it all for four years under Bush and grew the government. They created a new entitlement with no revenue. Went against the very tenets of what they said they believe.

One of the reasons I wrote the book was to show a whole lot of people how many stupid things we do. I don’t really blame presidents too much. You gotta get appropriations. I say the problem is not that we don’t get along. We get along too well. Government is twice the size it was 10 years ago. The president can’t spend the money if we don’t appropriate it. So it’s not a president problem. It’s a congressional problem.

EK: On the other side of that hypothetical, let’s say Obama wins, but Republicans hold the House and maybe even take the Senate. How do they act in that hypothetical? Are they more or less willing to compromise with Obama?

TC: I don’t know. I’m not good at predicting that. If President Obama is president again, those problems are still there and we have to solve them. He knows that. We’ve had conversations where he’s told me he’ll go much further than anyone believes he’ll go to solve the entitlement problem if he can get the compromise. And I believe him. I believe he would.

Didn’t he tell us once before that he wanted entitlement reform done by the end of his first term? Why the hesitation, champ? You just earned yourself a giant line of credit with the left by siding with them on their favorite boutique issue. Cash in.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

This is a little sad, the way you guys are trashing your boy Coburn for a one-paragraph statement. This is why nobody can or should work with you – you’re insane.
urban elitist on May 15, 2012 at 10:23 PM

Kinda like “Mission accomplished”? Or how about “macaca”?

Buy Danish on May 15, 2012 at 10:29 PM

In those cases, we were trashing

your

boy. In this case, you’re eating one of your own. Very Leninist.

What you don’t understand is that he’s a pragmatist. We all know that reform is inevitable. But we’re not going to do it the Paul Ryan way

ROFL

Bishop on May 15, 2012 at 10:29 PM

The guy extended the Bush tax cuts, failed to nationalize or break up the banks when he had a chance, escalated Afghanistan and offs terrorists via drone and invokes national security like I order another beer on a Saturday night. He’s damn near a Republican.

If Colburn and the other GOP “conservatives” had any balls they would be in continual filibuster and be daily wrecking havoc with Harry Reid.

Based on many similar comments, it’s fair to say the right wing fascists are coming out of the woodwork. Yes, filibuster until a single party state emerges, at which point democracy and compromise are unnecessary.

There’s nothing more amusing than hearing some of you nuts talk about protecting the Constitution and then advocate the violation of core principles of our Founding Fathers. The republic was designed to protect the people from the arbitrary rule of a majority and force competing interests to engage in compromise. Today’s right wing nuts are the worst nightmare of the Founding Fathers come true.

Based on many similar comments, it’s fair to say the right wing fascists are coming out of the woodwork. Yes, filibuster until a single party state emerges, at which point democracy and compromise are unnecessary

The guy extended the Bush tax cuts, failed to nationalize or break up the banks when he had a chance, escalated Afghanistan and offs terrorists via drone and invokes national security like I order another beer on a Saturday night. He’s damn near a Republican.

urban elitist on May 15, 2012 at 10:35 PM

What, is this where I jump in and say “Right on!”?

You should try categorizing all the lies that the TFGP sold you since 2008, you would have quite the mountain when finished and there’s still half a year to go in his stint. But you will still vote for him again.

Based on many similar comments, it’s fair to say the right wing fascists are coming out of the woodwork. Yes, filibuster until a single party state emerges, at which point democracy and compromise are unnecessary.
bayam on May 15, 2012 at 10:45 PM

“Well, what we’re going to have to do is continue to make progress on the economy over the next several months. And where Congress is not willing to act, we’re going to go ahead and do it ourselves.”

-President Obama

“What I’m not gonna do is wait for Congress. So wherever we have an opportunity and I have the executive authority to go ahead and get some things done, we’re just gonna go ahead and do ‘em.”

-President Obama

So bayam, you and I should meet at the voting booth in November. We can go vote for Mitt to keep the fascist right-winger Obama out of office, then we can get a beer.

So bayam, you and I should meet at the voting booth in November. We can go vote for Mitt to keep the fascist right-winger Obama out of office, then we can get a beer.

Bishop on May 15, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Which recent President hasn’t often employed executive orders to achieve his agenda? It’s as if Obama has set a precedent. Do you really not know any better?

It’s not the Dems that are refusing to compromise. There’s never been any question that spending cuts are on the table when matched with revenue increases. You may want to read Olympia Snowe or Orrin Hatch if you actually don’t know which political faction is preventing Congress from legislating.

There’s nothing more amusing than hearing some of you nuts talk about protecting the Constitution and then advocate the violation of core principles of our Founding Fathers. The republic was designed to protect the people from the arbitrary rule of a majority and force competing interests to engage in compromise. Today’s right wing nuts are the worst nightmare of the Founding Fathers come true.

bayam on May 15, 2012 at 10:45 PM

So all that arbitrary rule from 2006 to 2010 was just fine by you, right? The last 5 years under a mostly democratic controlled congress was also ok I am guessing. The founding fathers, when trying to protect this country in the Constitution, had you in mind.

As an Oklahoman, I am ready for Coburn to go as he has turned to the dark side. Why is it that the congressfolk in Washington cannot see what we all see about Obama? We all know what he is and they don’t seem to. That is frightening!

I always tell my broker to keep trying to buy TWA and if Steve “US Festival” Wozniak says to buy as much Facebook as possible “no matter the price” then it is bound to be the same mammoth bargain as Dutch East India Company and Pony Express, presently.

“Elitist”. Ha. You’re like a very plain girl who thinks that acting slutty will make her hot.

WeekendAtBernankes on May 15, 2012 at 10:38 PM

I’m not even sure what this means.

Yo

u can visit my cottage in France. I hear real estate is going to be cheap there, soon.

urban elitist on May 15, 2012 at 10:23 PM

Ah yes, I’ve heard of your French “cottage.”

Psychiatry calls it Figment d’Imagination.

viking01 on May 15, 2012 at 10:42 PM

Actually, I think once can retire to rural France — avoiding the hotspots of the Riviera — for a relatively modest sum. But I have a decade or so to figure it out.

The guy extended the Bush tax cuts, failed to nationalize or break up the banks when he had a chance, escalated Afghanistan and offs terrorists via drone and invokes national security like I order another beer on a Saturday night. He’s damn near a Republican.

urban elitist on May 15, 2012 at 10:35 PM

What, is this where I jump in and say “Right on!”?

You should try categorizing all the lies that the TFGP sold you since 2008, you would have quite the mountain when finished and there’s still half a year to go in his stint. But you will still vote for him again.

Bishop on May 15, 2012 at 10:48 PM

Actually, he’s been pretty good about keeping his word. He never promised to — and no one expected him to — nationalize or break up the banks, though the latter action would probably have been a good idea. He pledged to escalate Afghanistan and hinted about his affection for drones. The extension of the tax cuts was a plausible deal in a recession — I am unpersuaded he could have gotten better.

The question is: WHAT EXACTLY DOES OBAMA MEAN WHEN HE SAYS HE IS INTERESTED IN GOING MUCH FARTHER ON ENTITLEMENT REFORM IN HIS SECOND TERM?

What he has said his ultimate goal is would be SINGLE PAYER UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE in the style of the NHS in Britain, as favored by his recess appointee to oversee Medicare, Dr. Donald Berwwick.

What does that mean? IT means extreme rationing of health care to the elderly and disabled to pay for ‘preventative care’ and full care services for everyone who is 50 years old and under because those are an individuals ‘most productive years’ according to Berwick.

Translated: Remember a conversation with Biden and Obama on television during the last ‘health care debate’? Biden looked straight into the camera and said that at age 72 people should no longer be given more expensive care, including cancer and coronary treatment as well hip and knee replacements. Obama, when asked what to do about an elderly lady with a heart arrhythmia ( condition with an unstable heart beat requiring a pace maker) suggested that she should be ‘sent home with pain pills’. He went on to say that elderly people should be given more ‘palliative care’ rather than the testing and surgeries, therapies, or medications thy require to treat their conditions.

Why? So that the funds can be used to provide preventative care, treatment, testing, and medications for younger, healthier people with NO COST SHARE OR CO-PAYS.These benefits for younger people would include, but certainly not be limited to, free birth control, abortions on demand, obesity treatments, counseling and therapies, and unlimited drug and alcohol rehabilitation treatments.

They are not FREE. They will be at the expense of the pain, suffering and untimely deaths of seniors, the disabled, and veterans whose care will be cut to provide for these healthy, working age, adults. Children are already covered, the poor are already covered, seniors and the disabled are currently covered, veterans are currently covered, that just leaves the young, healthy, working age adults. To extend the ‘preventative and comprehensive care’ that the Obama administration wishes to extend them would mean cutting services and coverage to all other groups.

The NHS is broke. Cameron and the Parliament are working feverishly to try and re-introduce private heath care insurance back into the system in order to improve the quality and accessibility of care. 14,000 seniors die each year in Britain from treatable cancer because they were denied testing and/or treatment. Testing and treatment that is currently provided under Medicare. The NHS has been racked by scandals including patients dying in hospital beds from THIRST because no one answered their pleas for water because ‘nurses’ and staff didn’t speak or read English well enough to follow simple instructions on a chart a because of outright incompetence and indifference by nursing staff. Patients are being treated in corridors because beds are not available due to overcrowding and hospitals have been found to be filthy. These are conditions that would arise here if we had a similar system.

YET.. this is the system used as a model by the Obama administration.

THIS is what I think Obama means by ‘going farther on entitlement reform’.

I always tell my broker to keep trying to buy TWA and if Steve “US Festival” Wozniak says to buy as much Facebook as possible “no matter the price” then it is bound to be the same mammoth bargain as Dutch East India Company and Pony Express, presently.

I’m beginning to get the feeling that not everyone on this thread is aware that CCB, containing the recommendations made by Obama’s own deficit reduction committee, passed the house but failed to pass the senate because of 5 Democrat votes.

They controlled it all for four years under Bush and grew the government.

No they did not. The Senate requires 60 to pass anything and we never had that ever.

Not to excuse the GOP Moderates that spent like drunken sailors. Thankfully many are out and we are getting more and more out.

But it is funny watching Rove and others be so delusional that they think Romney has a real chance of winning this. Moderates have always lost since Nixon and Mitt will join the list. Though there is a small chance Obama could lose this.

Coburn is stark raving mad to believe Obama now when he promised this in 2008. Almost as mad as Rove thinking Mitt will win.

Rule 1: If it seems too good to be true, it probably is.
Rule 2: If it’s counterintuitive, there’s a reason for it.
Rule 3: Anything true can be explained to anybody
Rule 4: If you can create a coherent sentence, you should have more faith in yourself.

Obama, the man who as one of his first acts as President was to repeal the Clinton welfare reforms which were bipartisanly acclaimed as the most successful legislation of that era, wants to enact entitlement reform? That makes me lol out loud…

Yes, we agree that Obama hasn’t been on an executive order rampage as suggested by right wing radio. His trajectory is no different than that of Bush.

No they did not. The Senate requires 60 to pass anything and we never had that ever.

60 votes are required by a cloture vote, but not to pass a bill. In past Senate bodies, you didn’t necessarily need 60 votes for a bill to pass unless opponents were particularly aggravated by a piece of legislation.

Bayam even if your point about executive orders had any weight you would have to break down what those orders were, why they were signed, and how they went with or against the wishes of the American people or against the other party. I know that would be too hard compared to your simplistic yet expected posts. You’re really not near as smart as you pretend . That is clear.

Bayam even if your point about executive orders had any weight you would have to break down what those orders were, why they were signed, and how they went with or against the wishes of the American people or against the other party. I know that would be too hard compared to your simplistic yet expected posts. You’re really not near as smart as you pretend . That is clear.

Bayam…one other thing… you do realize as well that just because you can claim that another person or President did something similar that does not make your argument. That is another classic fallacious argument. I suggest you do some more research on debates and such techniques so that you can avoid them but of course you would be unable to post….hmmm…win/win.

60 votes are required by a cloture vote, but not to pass a bill. In past Senate bodies, you didn’t necessarily need 60 votes for a bill to pass unless opponents were particularly aggravated by a piece of legislation.

bayam on May 15, 2012 at 11:40 PM

You’ve needed 60 for cloture since Jimmy Carter’s presidency. It was 67 before then. There have been 5 POTUSes with filibuster-proof Senates, i.e., Senates with 60/67 Senators caucusing with the President’s party, since cloture was established in 1919: Wilson, FDR, LBJ, Carter and Obama.

As for “past Senate bodies,” I recall Democratic Senators threatening to filibuster Bush’s judicial nominees. Each party hates the filibuster when they are in power and loves it when they are in out of power. Without the filibuster, the Senate might as well be the House, which is exactly what the Founding Fathers did not want. It is supposed to be a deliberative body. It isn’t supposed to act hastily. That is why terms are 6 years and not 2. It is also why the Founders did not want the Senators to be elected directly by the people.

Riiiiiiiiiggggghhhhht. Obama will solve the problems with mini austerity that actually does nothing more than shift money around while the borrowing, printing, redistributing funds to cronies, and general theft still go on. The government will grow even more and not only that, but obambocare will not get dumped, just revised in a weaker and more expensive state than it is in now.

The only answer is to let the conservatives control both houses and the white house, then stomp on them daily until things get fixed and we’re on a track to get rid of this monsterous debt.

It’s going to take 16 years to fix what obama did in 3.5 years. Obama will only make it worse, but that’s his plan isn’t it?

We need a special charge of treason for people like him, and a minimum mandatory 5 year sentence in a STATE prison for each lie a politician utters and gets caught in. I think we also need to reduce ALL elected official position salaries to MINIMUM WAGE.

Southern Gent:
You brought up a very interesting situation……Coburn saying he saw the bin ladin death photos. Have any of you ever questioned the truth of his death?? Remember the week it supposedly happened and the story changed hourly? Doesn’t it strike you as odd that Obama refused to show those photos? Why? He sure as hell has used anything else that could benefit him and his election and this refusal just seems out of character for the egomaniac. Who else was it that said they viewed the death photos?….Oh, yeah, John Boehner. He’s so very trustworthy. We all know we can rely on his word. Obama claimed he couldn’t show the public those photos because they would inflame the muslims BUT on the one year anniversary he goes to their country to spike the football and rub their faces in it. Wouldn’t you think that would piss them off just a bit? None of this adds up and now the SEALS are conviently dead and can’t tell tales. Obama nor his cronies have ever told us the truth about anything so why should this fantasy be any different?

My Administration is committed to ensuring that the Federal Government serves the American people with the utmost effectiveness and efficiency. Over the last 2 years, we have made good progress and have saved taxpayer dollars by cutting waste and increasing the efficiency of Government operations by curbing uncontrolled growth in contract spending, terminating poorly performing information technology projects, deploying state of the art fraud detection tools to crack down on waste, focusing agency leaders on achieving ambitious improvements in high priority areas, and opening Government up to the public to increase accountability and accelerate innovation.

The American people must be able to trust that their Government is doing everything in its power to stop wasteful practices and earn a high return on every tax dollar that is spent. To strengthen that trust and deliver a smarter and leaner Government, my Administration will reinforce the performance and management reform gains achieved thus far; systematically identify additional reforms necessary to eliminate wasteful, duplicative, or otherwise inefficient programs; and publicize these reforms so that they may serve as a model across the Federal Government.

Now, in the end, how do we achieve this elusive goal?

A: Vice President Biden holds meetings.
A: Various political appointees tell the President how well they’ve done.

At the bottom is this gem:

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

Would that all of BO’s executive orders were this innocuous — only costing us a little (as every utterance by The Won is apt to do) in comparison to the regulations his departments are issuing.

We need a special charge of treason for people like him, and a minimum mandatory 5 year sentence in a STATE prison for each lie a politician utters and gets caught in. I think we also need to reduce ALL elected official position salaries to MINIMUM WAGE.

Wolfmoon on May 15, 2012 at 11:52 PM

OR……they are never allowed to leave the country, and all theri progeny must attend public schools. Their money must stay in dollars and in US banks.